• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?[W:771]

Men: Would you marry an American Woman?

  • Total voters
    83
lizzie said:
If crying it out came naturally to me, I'd do it, but you can't force yourself to respond against your nature and your conditioning, to emotional stimuli. Crying is my outlet for pain, but not for anger.
Click to expand...

So what is your outlet for anger then?
 
ChrisL said:
So what is your outlet for anger then?
Click to expand...

That is what I was referring to in the other post you quoted. I don't get angry very often, and when I do, I shut down, unless someone has made me really really angry, at which point I will verbally lash out, and become quite irrational until the two of us can persist in a verbal exchange for a long enough period of time to come back to civility and understanding. There aren't many things which can anger me.
 
lizzie said:
That is what I was referring to in the other post you quoted. I don't get angry very often, and when I do, I shut down, unless someone has made me really really angry, at which point I will verbally lash out, and become quite irrational until the two of us can persist in a verbal exchange for a long enough period of time to come back to civility and understanding. There aren't many things which can anger me.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think everyone gets to that point at least on a rare occasion. :lol:
 
ChrisL said:
Honestly, I think everyone gets to that point at least on a rare occasion. :lol:
Click to expand...

Well, I have a story which I wouldn't fully divulge on a public discussion forum, but the extreme point I can get to, when it comes to anger, isn't a place that very many people would dare to go, for fear that they could never come back. :lol:
 
lizzie said:
Well, I have a story which I wouldn't fully divulge on a public discussion forum, but the extreme point I can get to, when it comes to anger, isn't a place that very many people would dare to go, for fear that they could never come back. :lol:
Click to expand...

Okay, now you're starting to scare me. :lol:
 
lizzie said:
Nothing to be afraid of. I've been to the edge and back, and all I found there, was myself. :)
Click to expand...

Just don't get mad at me please. :2razz:
 
lizzie said:
Not to worry. I'm much more likely to carry it out on myself than anyone else.
Click to expand...

Don't be punching things now lizzie! You're liable to break your hand! :lol:
 
Gathomas88 said:
That's what dry wall is for. :yes:
Click to expand...

A couple of things.

1. Repairing dry wall is a pain in the ass.
2. Studs are every 16-24 inches apart. You will want to avoid those. The rule is that a loading bearing wall has them every 16 inches apart while a unload bearing wall has them every 24 inches apart.
3. Hitting a stud will break your hand easily.
4. If the house has been remodeled forget the above rule. Chances are studs are going to be random in areas that have been remodeled.

Good luck.
 
Henrin said:
A couple of things.

1. Repairing dry wall is a pain in the ass.
2. Studs are every 16-24 inches apart. You will want to avoid those. The rule is that a loading bearing wall has them every 16 inches apart while a unload bearing wall has them every 24 inches apart.
3. Hitting a stud will break your hand easily.
4. If the house has been remodeled forget the above rule. Chances are studs are going to be random in areas that have been remodeled.

Good luck.
Click to expand...

So what do YOU punch when you get angry? :mrgreen:
 
Peter King said:
That is a very weird way of looking at the dissolution of weddings (aka divorces). While the legal arbitration might be "no fault" but in most divorces there are grounds and reasons for that marriage to break up.
Click to expand...
There don't need to be any reasons given at all. All one has to do is simply say "irreconcile differences" and sign the dotted line and the marriage is over. I have seen my mother go thru 3 divorces, I know all about "irreconcile differences"...

And women have the power? Yes, they have the power to give up their intimacy and who they want to fall in love with but that is purely down to men wanting sex and women wanting relationships more often than just sex. Men do the vast majority of initiating because they want to get their leg over, before they did that they too had the choice as to who they want to target, so don't cry me a river on that subject please because both make choices and act upon those choices. Sadly most men think with their loins and women with their brains. And the whole male to female mating dance is the same all over the western industrialized world.
Click to expand...
Men don't make the ultimate choice. Men generally try and fail.. For the VAST majority of men, their first choice of mate/partner rejects them. Men, naturally, want to find the most attractive partner they can attract, but many times, the person they are most attracted to is not attracted to them. And men do most if not almost all the initiating, so the selection of acceptable mates rests on the woman. More often then not, she gets her first choice, or really close to her first choice of mate. Where as men go thru a lot more rejection then women do. So women have the power in relationships. When men were the primary bread winners, and females needed men in order to provide them with security and a roof over their heads, the male/female dating "dance" was equlized by the fact that women had sexual power, and men had financial/security power. In today's dating world, men no longer hold this power due to the equal rights movement. Now there exists an inbalance as a result of there being no counterbalence to a womans sexual power. Women have not changed, they still expect men to do all the initiating and provide the majority of the income. It is know that women rarely marry men who make significantly less, where as men marry all the way up and down the socioeconomic scale. Women are still being choosey, still expecting the traditional dating methods and are still using their sexual power to choose the best mate for them.

The whole problem is that female emancipation started slower in the US IMHO, in the Netherlands most people live in smaller and bigger towns and the process of emancipation of women and the re-education of men worked a lot quicker. This also has to do with the fact that some countries have truly separated the church/religious oppressive views from their government. And again, that too in part has to do with the vast landmass of the USA and the more rural living. In the Netherlands the catholic church too had it's claws into the province where I live some 40 years back but that has changed during that time.
Click to expand...

I don't think it started slower, I think it just started differently. In the US, the feminist/equal rights movement has quickly turned into a political/activist movement where as in most european/asian countries it has been more tame and less rhetorical. It has been agreed upon by all and the majority choose to enact laws, vs in the states it has been mostly women who have voted their own laws into place. Men have simply been trying to weather the storm sort to speak because any man that has ever tried standing up against the feminist movement to say "hey, thats not fair" has been steamrolled by feminists and their enablers (mostly testicleless men who put all women on a pedestal hoping it will get them somewhere) But that is changing quickly in places like Canada (where it is probably the worst) and also in places in North-eastern Europe.



No, women know that marriage is a partnership. The thing is that most men think their part of that partnership is working outside of the house and then coming home and doing not a lot more after that, except of course demanding intimacy on a regular basis. All other things like house cleaning, child rearing, cooking etc. is down to the wife as well as putting out if said man wants to have sex. Today women have more power than before because they have emancipated but that is how it should be. In the end usually it is still men who rule the roost or try to push their way through in many relationships if women do not fight their ground. Men see power in the relationship is a right, women have to fight for that right.
Click to expand...
Women do most of the housework because they still demand a man that makes more money then they do. And to make more money then they do, a man must work more hours or take jobs further away from the home. As I said above, women have not changed their traditional wants in men. Where as men have changed drastically over the last 4-5 decades. And as I mentioned above, the law here in the US protects women a lot more then men when it comes to relationships, sex and divorce. Men have virtually no defense against a woman who wishes to end a relationship on false pretenses or wishes to destroy a mans life.

And don't come with "in the US it is all different" because some things might be different but it is not like I am comparing the US with Pakistan or Indonesia. I am comparing the US with Europe and even though some things are different because of the size of the US, I think it has more to do with men grieving their loss of "power" because they now have to negotiate with their wives and most men are not that great at that.
Click to expand...

Men are able to negotiate with their wives prior to getting married.... a little... But in my expirience, and listening to my friends, the vast majority of them are afraid of their wives because they realize what their wives can do to them if they become even the least bit dissatisfied with the realationship. In today's dating environment, there is always a "john" hanging around in the background waiting for the relationship to break up so he can move in. Where as men, when they divorce, rarely have anyone to move on with. So it is generally much easier for a woman to break off a marriage then it is a for a man.

Now I know the US is not like an episode of the Dr. Phil show but he does not write those books and does his shows purely for entertainment and money. Women need more than just sex in a while and money, they need a partner who engages in a whole host of things with them, from child rearing to running the house hold but also spiritually and intellectually engaging their partners.
Click to expand...
Dr. Phil is a sellout douche!
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I'm the same way as lizzie -- the pressure bomb. Happened maybe three times in the last ten years.

Honestly, it's not that I think crying is "weak" or anything. It's just that I feel so sedated when I cry. It's like, "Goddamn it. So I'm gonna spend the next 10 minutes sitting here and crying and then I'm gonna be all tired and spend the rest of the night doing nothing? Really? *sigh*"

Although I do cry more often than I explode, probably not more than once or twice a year, unless it's been a horrendously bad year.
Click to expand...

I'm not a cryer either. I think women cry too much and when done around me it makes me feel uncomfortable. I would never tell them that of course!
 
herenow1 said:
I'm not a cryer either. I think women cry too much and when done around me it makes me feel uncomfortable. I would never tell them that of course!
Click to expand...

There is, IMO, no such thing as 'crying too much'.

Crying is a physical manifestation of an emotional release...there is nothing wrong with it. Laughing is the same thing...yet few would ever say that people 'laugh too much'.

In fact, to suppress one's strong emotions can cause all kinds of problems.

Additionally, because of outdated viewpoints about the healthy release of emotions, it takes more 'guts' to cry then not to cry.

So, as long as they are not crocodile tears, I say as long as people cry whenever they feel the need, then they are crying exactly the right amount.
 
DA60 said:
There is, IMO, no such thing as 'crying too much'.

Crying is a physical manifestation of an emotional release...there is nothing wrong with it. Laughing is the same thing...yet few would ever say that people 'laugh too much'.

In fact, to suppress one's strong emotions can cause all kinds of problems.

Additionally, because of outdated viewpoints about the healthy release of emotions, it takes more 'guts' to cry then not to cry.

So, as long as they are not crocodile tears, I say as long as people cry whenever they feel the need, then they are crying exactly the right amount.
Click to expand...

I gotta agree. What is crying too much exactly? We are so weird about emotions.

Honestly, I wish I was a bit more of a crier than I am. I tend to put it off, simply because I think I have too much to get done. Sometimes I'm right, but usually I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
Gathomas88 said:
I've gotta say. This is an almost entirely alien concept for me.

If I'm going to cry about anything, somebody had better have just died. :lol:
Click to expand...

That is usually what my tears are reserved for- a separation or a death. The last time I cried, and it was not consciously associated with loss, was the last time my husband and I had a disagreement, and it felt like I was losing him, and in fact, I was, but I didn't know it at the time. It wasn't too long before his death, and although he didn't consciously know he was going to die, I am now convinced that he did know at some level, as he repeatedly made mention of it in passing for several months prior to his passing. I think he was trying to emotionally separate, and I didn't understand at the time, and he could not explain it.

When I am angry, I can't usually bring myself to cry, although I wish I could. I tend to gravitate more toward the "numb" end of the spectrum, until I can effectively deal with the emotions, without doing something really stupid.
 
DA60 said:
There is, IMO, no such thing as 'crying too much'.

Crying is a physical manifestation of an emotional release...there is nothing wrong with it. Laughing is the same thing...yet few would ever say that people 'laugh too much'.

In fact, to suppress one's strong emotions can cause all kinds of problems.

Additionally, because of outdated viewpoints about the healthy release of emotions, it takes more 'guts' to cry then not to cry.

So, as long as they are not crocodile tears, I say as long as people cry whenever they feel the need, then they are crying exactly the right amount.
Click to expand...

The man every woman wants to be with!

 
Capster78 said:
There don't need to be any reasons given at all. All one has to do is simply say "irreconcile differences" and sign the dotted line and the marriage is over. I have seen my mother go thru 3 divorces, I know all about "irreconcile differences"...
Click to expand...

That is legal talk, irreconcilable differences normally stands for a failed marriage but that does not mean that the actions of the men in that marriage did not cause the marriage to fail.

Capster78 said:
Men don't make the ultimate choice. Men generally try and fail.. For the VAST majority of men, their first choice of mate/partner rejects them. Men, naturally, want to find the most attractive partner they can attract, but many times, the person they are most attracted to is not attracted to them. And men do most if not almost all the initiating, so the selection of acceptable mates rests on the woman. More often then not, she gets her first choice, or really close to her first choice of mate. Where as men go thru a lot more rejection then women do. So women have the power in relationships. When men were the primary bread winners, and females needed men in order to provide them with security and a roof over their heads, the male/female dating "dance" was equlized by the fact that women had sexual power, and men had financial/security power. In today's dating world, men no longer hold this power due to the equal rights movement. Now there exists an inbalance as a result of there being no counterbalence to a womans sexual power. Women have not changed, they still expect men to do all the initiating and provide the majority of the income. It is know that women rarely marry men who make significantly less, where as men marry all the way up and down the socioeconomic scale. Women are still being choosey, still expecting the traditional dating methods and are still using their sexual power to choose the best mate for them.
Click to expand...

They have the power to accept a man's advances, that is not the same as the power in relationships. Men have the power to quit relationships whenever they want. There lack of balance in a wedding has nothing to do with men providing and women having the power to put out if they want too. There are a whole load of reasons why marriages have a lack of balance, sex is only a small part of that IMHO.

Women do not think with their reproductive organs, that is the way men operate a lot of the time. A woman chooses a male because she is attracted to him/loves him, few women would choose a man on the basis of how good he is in the sack.

Capster78 said:
I don't think it started slower, I think it just started differently. In the US, the feminist/equal rights movement has quickly turned into a political/activist movement where as in most european/asian countries it has been more tame and less rhetorical. It has been agreed upon by all and the majority choose to enact laws, vs in the states it has been mostly women who have voted their own laws into place. Men have simply been trying to weather the storm sort to speak because any man that has ever tried standing up against the feminist movement to say "hey, thats not fair" has been steamrolled by feminists and their enablers (mostly testicleless men who put all women on a pedestal hoping it will get them somewhere) But that is changing quickly in places like Canada (where it is probably the worst) and also in places in North-eastern Europe.
Click to expand...

The whole problem in the US is that political power is very male dominated and political voting power is slowly transferred into real change. With the whole structure of US politics it is very difficult for women to get into politics and for change to take place. In most European countries it is easier for women to elect politicians that care and promote womens rights.

And women in Europe were also activist up to a point to get equal rights. In the US it is more conservative politicians who want to keep the good old times in place and women have to use political activism to get equal rights through the courts because the political reality in the US means that getting equal rights through the political process is next to impossible (in a timely fashion).


Capster78 said:
Women do most of the housework because they still demand a man that makes more money then they do. And to make more money then they do, a man must work more hours or take jobs further away from the home. As I said above, women have not changed their traditional wants in men. Where as men have changed drastically over the last 4-5 decades. And as I mentioned above, the law here in the US protects women a lot more then men when it comes to relationships, sex and divorce. Men have virtually no defense against a woman who wishes to end a relationship on false pretenses or wishes to destroy a mans life.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but even in households were men and women both work full time jobs, it is still the woman who has to do the bulk of household and child rearing jobs. Men still think they have the rights to "free time", "time with the guys" and "chill out time" even when the work in the house still has to be done.

And when the marriage breaks up it is still the husband who has to provide money to the wife in order for her to care for his (and her) children. And that is mostly because in the US there is no financial safety net which women get part of the money from until the child is old enough to go to school full time (at which time the woman is to start working close to full time).

In the Netherlands men have to pay considerably less most of the time than in the US. In the US this leads to unfair judgments towards the men. Maybe it is time for US law to order women to start working as soon as the children are old enough to be in school full time. If the women are not trained enough the US states might provide loans in order for her to start learning a trade so that she can stop draining her husbands pocketbook.

Capster78 said:
Men are able to negotiate with their wives prior to getting married.... a little... But in my expirience, and listening to my friends, the vast majority of them are afraid of their wives because they realize what their wives can do to them if they become even the least bit dissatisfied with the realationship. In today's dating environment, there is always a "john" hanging around in the background waiting for the relationship to break up so he can move in. Where as men, when they divorce, rarely have anyone to move on with. So it is generally much easier for a woman to break off a marriage then it is a for a man.
Click to expand...

The problem then is that these are not healthy and balanced relationships which were achieved through negotiations and voicing expectations about what they would like to achieve in the marriage. And after the marriage has taken place it is even more important to negotiate and communicate to keep the marriage healthy. And I am sorry? A "John" hanging around in the background? How about the "Susan's" hanging around to seduce men? That accusation can be reasoned for both sexes. The whole problem there is that most women start having affairs because they are not satisfied in their marriage and they are looking for love and closeness, men do not need such reasons, usually they will do it just for sex.

And the reasons that it is much easier for women to break off the marriage is not the whole story, women usually see break ups as the last resort. Men don't want to divorce as long as they still have their sex, still have their laundry done and food on the table.

Capster78 said:
Dr. Phil is a sellout douche!
Click to expand...

That is your opinion, he usually has a lot of fair points to make.
 
ChrisL said:
Don't punch the counter. That would be counterproductive! :2razz:
Click to expand...

Nice one. :lol:

Henrin said:
A couple of things.

1. Repairing dry wall is a pain in the ass.
2. Studs are every 16-24 inches apart. You will want to avoid those. The rule is that a loading bearing wall has them every 16 inches apart while a unload bearing wall has them every 24 inches apart.
3. Hitting a stud will break your hand easily.
4. If the house has been remodeled forget the above rule. Chances are studs are going to be random in areas that have been remodeled.

Good luck.
Click to expand...

Yea, you learn #1 fairly quickly, in my experience.

i.e.

"Son of a &%E^$#!!!"

*Looks at arm lodged halfway through wall*

"Oh, sh*t!"

:lol:

I frankly think I'd much rather punch a stud than leave a hole to fix.

lizzie said:
That is usually what my tears are reserved for- a separation or a death. The last time I cried, and it was not consciously associated with loss, was the last time my husband and I had a disagreement, and it felt like I was losing him, and in fact, I was, but I didn't know it at the time. It wasn't too long before his death, and although he didn't consciously know he was going to die, I am now convinced that he did know at some level, as he repeatedly made mention of it in passing for several months prior to his passing. I think he was trying to emotionally separate, and I didn't understand at the time, and he could not explain it.

When I am angry, I can't usually bring myself to cry, although I wish I could. I tend to gravitate more toward the "numb" end of the spectrum, until I can effectively deal with the emotions, without doing something really stupid.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry for your loss. :(

While I don't cry, and really wouldn't want to, this isn't to say that I don't still get "choked up" a little bit every now and then. It just happens to be a feeling that will usually pass within a few seconds.

It also isn't usually something that happens in response to stress. It's much more likely to occur while watching a sad (or beautiful) movie, or witnessing something meaningful.
 
Gathomas88 said:
I'm sorry for your loss. :(

While I don't cry, and really wouldn't want to, this isn't to say that I don't still get "choked up" a little bit every now and then. It just happens to be a feeling that will usually pass within a few seconds.

It also isn't usually something that happens in response to stress. It's much more likely to occur while watching a sad (or beautiful) movie, or witnessing something meaningful.
Click to expand...

Thanks hon. That was just an example among several in my lifetime, of my own response to emotional stressors, and it wasn't a play for sympathy- just an anecdotal example. Sadness and separation is what can make me cry, and even that takes some pretty extreme circumstances. Anger doesn't elicit that response in me, but tends to shut me down for awhile, to the point that even if I wanted to cry, I couldn't, and I have been at that point for months at a time. The only thing that has generally ever had the effect of angering me to the point of instant action, is to do or say something which I perceive as potentially harmful to someone that I love. My protective instinct regarding anyone that I personally care about, runs really strong.
 
lizzie said:
Thanks hon. That was just an example among several in my lifetime, of my own response to emotional stressors, and it wasn't a play for sympathy- just an anecdotal example. Sadness and separation is what can make me cry, and even that takes some pretty extreme circumstances. Anger doesn't elicit that response in me, but tends to shut me down for awhile, to the point that even if I wanted to cry, I couldn't, and I have been at that point for months at a time. The only thing that has generally ever had the effect of angering me to the point of instant action, is to do or say something which I perceive as potentially harmful to someone that I love. My protective instinct regarding anyone that I personally care about, runs really strong.
Click to expand...

You should get a punching bag. That's another great way to relieve stress and anger/aggravation, whatever ails you. :) Good exercise at the same time!
 
ChrisL said:
You should get a punching bag. That's another great way to relieve stress and anger/aggravation, whatever ails you. :) Good exercise at the same time!
Click to expand...

I bought one a while back. I actually hit it so hard that I wound up breaking the damn thing. :lol:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom